Abstract
Objective:
To investigate the magnitude and relative contribution of different sources of measurement errors present in the estimation of food intake via the 24-h recall technique.
Design:
We applied variance decomposition methods to the difference between data obtained from the USDA's Automated Multiple Pass Method (AMPM) 24-h recall technique and measured food intake (MFI) from a 16-week cafeteria-style feeding study. The average and the variance of biases, defined as the difference between AMPM and MFI, were analyzed by macronutrient content, subject and nine categories of foods.
Subjects:
Twelve healthy, lean men (age, 39±9 year; weight, 79.9±8.3 kg; and BMI, 24.1±1.4 kg/m2).
Results:
Mean food intakes for AMPM and MFI were not significantly different (no overall bias), but within-subject differences for energy (EI), protein, fat and carbohydrate intakes were 14, 18, 23 and 15% of daily intake, respectively. Mass (incorrect portion size) and deletion (subject did not report foods eaten) errors were each responsible for about one-third of the total error. Vegetables constituted 8% of EI but represented >25% of the error across macronutrients, whereas grains that contributed 32% of EI contributed only 12% of the error across macronutrients.
Conclusions:
Although the major sources of reporting error were mass and deletion errors, individual subjects differed widely in the magnitude and types of errors they made.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$259.00 per year
only $21.58 per issue
Rent or buy this article
Prices vary by article type
from$1.95
to$39.95
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Barnard J, Tapsell L, Davies P, Brenninger V, Storlien L (2002). Relationship between high energy expenditure and variation in dietary intake with reporting accuracy on 7 day food records and diet histories in a group of healthy adult volunteers. Eur J Clin Nutr 56, 358–367.
Bellach B, Kohlmeier L (1998). Energy adjustment does not control for differential bias in nutritional epidemiology. J Clin Epidemiol 51, 395–398.
Bingham S (1994). The use of 24-h urine samples and energy expenditure to validate dietary assessments. Am J Clin Nutr 59, 227S–231S.
Black A, Cole T (2000). Within- and between-subject variation in energy expenditure measured by the doubly-labelled water technique: implications for validating reported dietary energy intake. Eur J Clin Nutr 54, 386–394.
Black A, Goldberg G, Jebb S, Livingstone M, Cole T, Prentice A (1991). Critical evaluation of energy intake data using fundamental principles of energy physiology: 2. Evaluating the results of published surveys. Eur J Clin Nutr 45, 583–599.
Conway JM, Ingwersen LA, Moshfegh AJ (2004). Accuracy of dietary recall using the USDA five-step multiple-pass method in men: an observational validation study. J Am Diet Assoc 104, 595–603.
Conway JM, Ingwersen LA, Vinyard BT, Moshfegh AJ (2003). Effectiveness of the US Department of Agriculture 5-step multiple-pass method in assessing food intake in obese and nonobese women. Am J Clin Nutr 77, 1171–1178.
Godwin SL, Chambers E, Cleveland L (2004). Accuracy of reporting dietary intake using various portion-size aids in-person and via telephone. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 104, 585–594.
Harnack L, Steffen L, Arnett DK, Gao S, Luepker RV (2004). Accuracy of estimation of large food portions. J Am Diet Assoc 104, 804–806.
Hill RJ, Davies PS (2001). The validity of self-reported energy intake as determined using the doubly labelled water technique. Br J Nutr 85, 415–430.
Kipnis V, Midthune D, Freedman LS, Bingham S, Schatzkin A, Subar A et al. (2001). Empirical evidence of correlated biases in dietary assessment instruments and its implications. Am J Epidemiol 153, 394–403.
Kipnis V, Subar AF, Midthune D, Freedman LS, Ballard-Barbash R, Troiano RP et al. (2003). Structure of dietary measurement error: results of the OPEN biomarker study. Am J Epidemiol 158, 14–21; discussion 22–16.
Krebs-Smith SM, Graubard BI, Kahle LL, Subar AF, Cleveland LE, Ballard-Barbash R (2000). Low energy reporters vs others: a comparison of reported food intakes. Eur J Clin Nutr 54, 281–287.
Lansky D, Brownell KD (1982). Estimates of food quantity and calories: errors in self-report among obese patients. Am J Clin Nutr 35, 727–732.
Novotny JA, Rumpler WV, Riddick H, Hebert JR, Rhodes D, Judd JT et al. (2003). Personality characteristics as predictors of underreporting of energy intake on 24-h dietary recall interviews. J Am Diet Assoc 103, 1146–1151.
Paul DR, Rhodes DG, Kramer M, Baer DJ, Rumpler WV (2005). Validation of a food frequency questionnaire by direct measurement of habitual ad libitum food intake. Am J Epidemiol 162, 806–814.
Rumpler WV, Kramer M, Rhodes DG, Paul DR (2006). The impact of the covert manipulation of macronutrient intake on energy intake and the variability in daily food intake in nonobese men. Int J O (2005) 30, 774–781.
Searle S, Casella G, McCulloch CE (1992). Variance Components. John Wiley and Sons: New York.
Subar AF, Kipnis V, Troiano RP, Midthune D, Schoeller DA, Bingham S et al. (2003). Using intake biomarkers to evaluate the extent of dietary misreporting in a large sample of adults: the OPEN study. Am J Epidemiol 158, 1–13.
Trabulsi J, Schoeller DA (2001). Evaluation of dietary assessment instruments against doubly labeled water, a biomarker of habitual energy intake. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 281, E891–E899.
US Department of Agriculture ARS (2002). USDA Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, Release 15. In:U.S. Government Printing Office: Washington, DC. Nutrient Data Laboratory Home Page, http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp.
Weber J, Reid P, Greaves K, DeLany J, Standford V, Going S et al. (2001). Validity of self-reported energy intake in lean and obese young women, using two nutrient databases, compared with total energy expenditure by doubly labeled water. Eur J Clin Nutr 55, 940–950.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rumpler, W., Kramer, M., Rhodes, D. et al. Identifying sources of reporting error using measured food intake. Eur J Clin Nutr 62, 544–552 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602742
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602742
Keywords
This article is cited by
-
Relationship between caffeine intake and thyroid function: results from NHANES 2007–2012
Nutrition Journal (2023)
-
Blockchain adoption in food supply chain for new business opportunities: an integrated approach
Operations Management Research (2023)
-
Association between ultra-processed food consumption and cognitive performance in US older adults: a cross-sectional analysis of the NHANES 2011–2014
European Journal of Nutrition (2022)
-
The effects of grazing on daily caloric intake and dietary quality
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity (2021)
-
Is misreporting of dietary intake by weighed food records or 24-hour recalls food specific?
European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (2018)